“Binding Arbitration”
June 2000
 

Viewpoint Article

Council Member Dave Romero

When I was first elected to the City Council in 1992, I brought with me 36 years experience as a City Department Head and a thorough knowledge of City compensation policies and practices. During my service on the City Council, I have been an advocate for improved compensation and working conditions for City employees. I have often argued for their cause during negotiations, encouraged improvements in benefits, and have often requested updated survey information on comparable cities. I am a continuing member of the City Employee Organization, and in many ways act as an advocate of City employees. I am appreciative that it is our City employees who accomplish the work of the City.

With this long history of employee support, and with about 40 Fire and Police in the audience, why did I take a lead in refusing to place the defective Fire and Police Association Binding Arbitration petition on a Council agenda for discussion? I’ve known many of the Police and Fire representatives for years. They are my friends. They are heroes to all of us. Their petition was signed by almost 6,000 voters, indicating a strong public interest. Did we somehow deny the public the right to be heard by insisting that the petition be properly done before we considered it? With elections coming up, why would I take the lead against an action strongly supported by Police and Fire and perhaps the general public as well? I hope this article will make more understandable my reasoning for my action.

First, I don’t believe that our Police and Fire association members have been poorly treated by the Council. During the past 13 years they have achieved salary increases and benefits in working conditions far in excess of any other City Employee group, at a rate 1 _ - 2 times the Consumer Price Index. According to City records, Police Officer total compensation this year (including overtime) will average $75,111, Firefighters total compensation (including overtime) will average $79,591, compared to the City general employee total compensation of $50,612 (including overtime). Some members in the Fire and Police Association are even compensated higher (with overtime) than some members of the Management Team (Department Heads) of the City.

Firefighters work 24-hour shifts, which translate to 10 days on the job per month. Police officers are on 12 hour shifts which translates to 15 days on the job per month. The City has provided first class buildings and state-of-the-art equipment to work with.

City policies call for an arbitrator to be called in case of impasse, and this has recently taken place. The arbitrator’s ruling, however, is advisory. The final decision still rests with the Council, which has the fiscal responsibility for the City.

During a recruitment to fill 10 firefighter positions last year the City received over 800 applications. During the last five recruitments for police officers over the past two years the City has received an average of 37 applications for each position. Someone must feel these are pretty good jobs.

My second, and much more fundamental point, deals with the nature of Binding Arbitration. The public elects Council Members to provide general management and oversight of the City. Probably the most important job of the Council is to assure the City’s fiscal stability. Consider that 75% of the General Fund City operating budget goes toward salaries and benefits. Of that amount, police and fire salaries represent about 60%. Or stated another way, Police and Fire budgets represent almost 50% of the total City General Fund operating budget. It is absolutely critical that final decisions on this largest budget item be made by the City Council. With Binding Arbitration, this budget decision will be made by third parties who are not residents of the City, have any knowledge of local funding constraints, and most importantly, are not accountable to the voters. If voters are unhappy with individual Council Members, they can simply not re-elect them. If our citizens are unhappy with members of the Binding Arbitration team, there is simply no recourse.

Binding Arbitration regarding working conditions removes accountability from both the Police and Fire Chiefs (and ultimately the City Council and the voters), and replaces it with no one being accountable.

Because Binding Arbitration strikes at the very heart of home rule, hundreds of California Cities (including SLO) have joined with the California League of Cities in opposing Senate Bill 402 which would impose on cities and counties (but not on the State itself) Binding Arbitration regarding Police and Fire salaries and working conditions. This bill may pass and impose onerous conditions similar to ongoing State action that takes away $1.5 million in property tax from SLO every year. We won’t go down without a fight on actions that reduce the City’s ability to serve our citizens, whether imposed by the State or presented by City employees.

It’s not a question of supporting our local Police and Fire. We do! It’s a question of taking away local accountability. That question is so important to providing proper service to our citizens, that personal friendships and support during elections must fade to insignificance.

The question of Binding Arbitration will undoubtedly be on the ballot this fall. Please read the provisions very carefully because this policy issue will have a major effect on the City Council’s ability to govern our City.